Usool al Fiqh Fall 2009

Final Exam 100% or 90% (One final, November 23, one week before last week of class)

Pop Quiz 10% at the discretion of the instructor

Basic Outline of the Class

Topic 1: Introductory Material and Definitions (Kamali, pp. 1-13)

Topic 2: Hukm Shar’I(Law or Value ofShareeah) (Kamali, pp. 321-355)

Topic 3: The Sources of the Shareeah (Kamali, pp. 14-86)

Topic 4: Rules of Interpretation

What is Islamic Legal Theory?

How to derive rulings from the sources of Islam. What are the sources of Islam?

Usool means asal or foundation or daleel or evidence

Fiqh means understanding - lexical root

What did the term fiqh develop into?

Jurispuridence / Aqeedah

Fiqh al-Akbar:The Greatest Fiqh (not all is it from Abu Hanifah)

-Talk about Fiqh includes everything but aqeeda

What would be a good definition of fiqh as a science or field? The field of fiqh what is it all about?

Fiqh is talking about actions - things that people are doing, supposed to do.

The goal of Fiqh is to look at every specific action and give ashariahwieght to every action

There are 5 general categories:

1. Fard/wajib \

2.Mandoob(mustahab) | halal

3. Mubaah - permissible /

4. Makrooh hated or disliked

5. Haram

Any other important job of fuqaha besides the above 5? Yes...

Categorize into what is (not just the action, but how it was done):

- Sahih (sound / valid)

-Batil (void)

Usool ul fiqh: theory behind the category. What does haraam really mean? what does Mubaah mean?

Usool ul fiqh deals with the principles behind the fiqh. It is the foundation or roots of Fiqh. When a faqih makes a conclusion his conclusion is not just random conclusion but it is based on certain evidences and principles.

We are concerned with what is really the theory and driving factor behind fiqh.

For someone to be a faqih, does he really have to know Usool ul fiqh? What about those who take a book of madhab and give rulings based on those books (even if he has done on all the 4 madahib), is that person a faqih (people who practice taqleed)? No but this has developed in the Muslim history. They pass it on without really knowing the foundations of the rulings and how the ruling was derived.

Fiqh is the output of Usool. In order to get to these conclusions, what are some of the things that we have to know:

1) What are the sources of Islamic Law. In other words what is an authority in Islamic Law.

- Quran,

- Sunnah. We have to define what is the Quran and what is the Sunnah.

- Ijma'

-Statement of a sahabi? (Difference of opinion amongst the scholars)

- we're trying to establish what is a Hujjah in Islamic Law.

2) How do we derive rulings from the sources?

- what do we mean by this?

- for example in the quran, Allah (swt) says, "Establish the Salah". This is a text from the Quran, so this aspect of how to derive rulings from the sources. Now we have identifed the quran as hujjah, the question is how do we make conclusions from this verse in the quran? If you look atthe wording in arabic, you see that the wording is in the imperitive. Impertives in English: do, go, sit, stop (commands). In arabic, imperatives have a certain form that they conform to.

Recognizing that what is the imperitive, is this part of Usool ul Fiqh? The fact that something is imperitive is part of arabic language not part of usool. It existed before Usool existed. So one of the field usool relies on is the Arabic language. What does an imperitive imply? Imperitive in general implies obligation. Is it directly from arabic language that we can say that imperitive implies obligation? How do we know this? is this true as a fact? If I tell you in this class that you have to obey me, and if I tell you to stand. You know fromt eh class that standing in the class is not obligatory. So how can we conclude that the imperitive imply obligation? This becomes a issue for the legal theorist. Does it imply obligation, permission orrecommendation? all 3 are options.

We first need to derive what is the general principle. "Imperative implies obligation" [General Rule]. When you take this general rule and apply to a particular case, the context of that case or other evidence related to that case may say that this is a general rule but in this particular case it does not imply obligation. So we fist need to establish the general rule and then we can go to the specifics.

Allah says about Jumuah prayer (فإذا قضيت الصلاة فانتشروا في الأرض وابتغوا من فضل الله - 62:10), when prayer is done go out and seek bounty of Allah. now is this obligatory? This is the verse in the quran where imperative is used so first thing we see is that it is obligation. Now we see that if there is any sign to see if this impertivie is optional.Here, the imperative is implying permissibility.

#2 is basically about the methodology. You want to get from the text of the quran, some of ruling/conclusion. And the way that is done, there has to be some kind of methodology. If that methodology is complete/sound/comprehensive than it would deal with exceptions and how to apply them.

What are some of the basic reasons why people make mistakes particularly in shariah perspective. One of the main reasons is methodology is incorrect.

- incorrect methodology is one of the main reasons. using rejected ahadeeth (some people say all ahadeeth are the same, we'll reject all of them or accept all of them - this is a mistake in methedology).

- insufficient data can be a source of the problem (sometimes, there is some text out there but the individual is not aware of it, esp withrespectto the text of the words of the Prophet (saw) or the Quran).

ex recent book "encycolpedia of islam" written by a couple of non-muslims - under the section on alcohol, they said there is nothing explicitly prohibiting alcohol in the Qur'an and bring the verse about "don't approach the salah while intoxicated" (4:43 - يا أيها الذين آمنوا لا تقربوا الصلاة وأنتم سكارى حتى تعلموا ما تقولون) they are missing the other verse about "avoid it " (5:90 - يا أيها الذين آمنوا إنما الخمر والميسر والأنصاب والأزلام رجس من عمل الشيطان فاجتنبوه لعلكم تفلحون).

- when we make these rulings, we have to have evidence for theserulings. We cannot make a ruling unless we have an evidence to support the ruling. What about `aql, rational argument, as evidence to support one of the principles? [let's leave qiyaas out for now]. Let's call it logic. Can we use logic as one of the proofs of the principles. Logic or aql is used if there seems to be something definitive. One of the rules they have come up with, if two mujtahids come to a contradictory opinion on one act, then one of them must be wrong. This is based on logic. If thereis something that is rationally sound and undeniable than that's acceptable.

What can we use as evidence for the generalrule "imperitive implies obligation". Prophet(saw) when speaking about miswak he said, "if it were not hard on my ummah, I'd have ordered them to use the miswak." This shows that when Prophet(saw) commands it would be an obligation.

3) who is qualified to implement usool. Who is a mujtahid. What does someone need to take the rules of Usool and make ijtihad. What is Ijtihad? Deducing rulings. People make ijtihaad.....(to be continued..)

fiqh - law or jurisprudence - all the detailed laws we know. most ppl however give it a more technical definition (the discipline that deals with the practical laws derived from the detailed individual evidences of/in the sources of the law - (related to deeds of a human)). deals with the practical laws.

3aqeeda - outside of scope of fiqh.

islamic law/jurisprudence compared to secular law - questions of ethics/morality fall into fiqh. fiqh speaks of things that are haram (and, by implication, saying it's a sin to commit this). fiqh can also talk about intention and so on. more comprehensive than western concept of jurisprudence (b/c secular law tries to leave morality out of issue).

fiqh - result of usool ul fiqh. not a haphazard body of law, but result of what is deduced from usool ul fiqh.

difference between shari3a and fiqh - some ppl use the two terms interchangably, but technically speaking, shari3a is the text of the quran and sunnah, and as such it is perfect and unchallengable, whereas fiqh is what is derived from quran and sunnah. fiqh will include human effort and so aspects of fiqh can change (can change over time) - shari3a doesn't change, it's permanent. fiqh rulings can also be wrong.

fiqh ruling can change - ex organ transplants - (kidney transplant) - over time, technology improved quite a bit - in original state, when it was very risky, some fuqaha may have said it's too risky for individuals and therefore this is not allowable because of harm that results from it. but as technology improves and dangers/risks lessen, fiqh ruling can change.

fiqh - "derived rules" from the sources of quran and sunnah.

usool al fiqh - foundations and principles on which fiqh is based. more explicitly, it's the study of the sources, evidences, and methedology of fiqh.

fiqh and usool al fiqh are two different disciplines. however, one would hope that someone who is in fiqh field has background in usool ul fiqh.

examples [is it related to fiqh or usool ul fiqh]

- "prayer is obligatory" - related to fiqh (ruling related to a detail of an individual act/practice of a human being - "what is the ruling of this deed?").

- "tahara is required for prayer" - related tofiqh (talking about an action (prayer) and what things are prerequisites for that action to take place).

- "silent ijma3 (ijma3 sukooti) is not a 7ujjah" [opinion that is stated by some ppl and other scholars are silent or we don't know their opinion on the issue] - related to usool ul fiqh.

- "marriage is not valid without a wali" - related to fiqh.

- "the command to perform an act is not at the same time a command to make up an act" - (sometimes in shari3a, ordered to do something - so simply the fact ordering us to do something doesn't imply that if we miss it, we are required to make it up) - related to usool ul fiqh.

class is all about usool al fiqh, foundation of fiqh. lots of benefits that come from study of usool al fiqh. by knowing proper methodolgy and sources and evidences, a lot of fruits come out of it.

helps us understand why scholars differ (some of the reasons they differ come back to issues of usool ul fiqh).

not only do you have to agree on what part of quran or ahadeeth to use, but also have to agree on methodology. by studying usool ul fiqh, understand how scholars come to different views. helps if you understand where the different opinion comes from (even if you don't necessarily agree).

terms related to usool ul fiqh -

- ijtihad: deriving rules from the sources - (resort to it if text of quran and sunnah is not definitive on an issue).

if the text is not definitive that leaves room for ijtihad, but there is no ijtihad in the presence of definitive text

- one of goals is to help us identify what is a definitive text and what isn't.

- goal isn't to have different usool, but there are some aspects that scholars may differ on. ex, there used to be a blind obedience to certain mathahib and some said even "the door of ijtihad is closed" - so came a time of stagnation wherein you took what scholars said. this never happened in the field of usool ul fiqh (door of ijtihad was never closed within usool ul fiqh). sometimes, it's hard to tell which approach is better.

history of usool ul fiqh

- practice of usool ul fiqh existed before the science of usool ul fiqh (same way as there was physics before first physicist, etc). even during time of Prophet (saw), there were times in which if an issue came up, you could go up and ask the Prophet (saw) and get answer from the Prophet (or revelation). when were not with Prophet (saw), issues arose sometimes, and sahaba had to make ijtihad. wasn't haphazard, had some reasoning for what they did. made some conclusions based on their understanding of quran and sunnah. as thus, they are using usool ul fiqh (even if they don't spell it out and say "got from point A to this conclusion and here is the methodology i use" - but obviously they are using a methodology and deriving laws from Quran and sunnah). this existed from time of Prophet (saw), after death of Prophet (saw), and we find in some of statements of sa7aba some of the early inklings or developments of usool ul fiqh, esp in statements of 3omar ibn al-Khattab (ra) where in he wrote to his judges that he should compare matters that are similar to each other and make similar judgements - precursor to "qiyas" - analogy. Prophet (saw) before him pointed to this as well.

- even schools of fiqh began to develop even before usool became a science. for example, hanafi school - abu hanifa born 80-90 (died 150) - hanafi fiqh in iraq, and imam malik in madinah born ~100, (died 180-190) - we think of imam malik and imam abu hanifa as founders of schools of fiqh - did they have usool ul fiqh methodologies that they were following? did they record them? do we have books from them about their usool?

- from imam malik and abu hanifa - we don't have anything we know of about usool.

- imam al shafi3i's "al risala" was one of first books on usool - imam shafi3i was student of imam malik and travelled to iraq and met with students of abu hanifa and wrote al-risala ("shafi3i's resala" - english translation translated by majid khadduri - who btw is not a muslim, a christian - one of other books he translated was a book by mohammed al shabani, student of abu hanifa, "islamic law of nations" - and another book, "the virtue of war" by two evangelical christians (webster/cole) and in that book, they said "even the muslim scholar majid khadduri would agree with our statement about jihad" -- so yeah, he wasn't actually a muslim.

- one of reasons he wrote the book (some ppl claimed and said shafi3i is the founder of usool ul fiqh) - what lead shafi3i to do this and his ultimate purpose was that what he saw, was that from time of Prophet (saw) and time of sahaba, by the time that he lived, there was some straying from way of sa7aba and Prophet - so he wrote this to show ppl the correct way and try to bring them back to correct methodology of usool ul fiqh.

- it is one of earliest books. others claim that abu hanifa's student wrote book on usool ul fiqh - but from early years/generations, only risala passed on (probably b/c of importance of the work).

- sometimes, "hanafi view" and "other three views" - ex diff between fard and wajib. approach of hanafis very different than approach of other three schools. hanafis versus everyone else in many cases.

approaches to usool ul fiqh - approach of fuqahaa and the approach of mutakalimoon

-start from scratch/zero (completely from theory). ask what are sources of islamic law - what is the quran (let's define it), give evidence as to why it's source in islamic law - sunnah, what is it, etc. completely theorteical approach that doesn't touch fiqh at all. how do we approach hadeeth of Prophet (saw), how do we derive from Quran and Sunnah or arabic language. theory based. as thus, they sometimes got into issues that are useless (was Prophet (saw) protected from sin before he was a Prophet - things that have no practical purpose).

- is there a body of fiqh we can go to and say "here is the fiqh, let's see how laws are concluded from this?" - quran and sunnah (talk about salah, for example, but don't say salah is wajib or what are shuroot etc) - then fiqh.

homonym - one word that has different meanings

Hanafi fiqh - how Hanafees derive their usool

-mawali has different meanings to it

- upper and lower mawali

-1. someone who has freed you

-2. ?

" the freer and the freed are both known as 'mawali'"

october 12, 2009

============

Hanafi Approach is more practical since it is based on fiqh.

The way hanafi school analyze text is different compared to the other 3 schools.

Hanafi Fuqaha versus the Shafai, Hanbalis, Muatazilah, Malikis (All of these schools are known as Mutakallimoon- different from the Mutakkallimoon used in Aqeeda terminology)

Hanafi Usool Approach: Start from Fiqh and then derive usool

However, is there an unbiased, independent thing called Fiqh in general? When we say this, we're talking about Hanafi scholars, Abu Haneefah, Abu Yusuf and Muhammad Shaibani. Fom their fiqh they go to Usool.

Homonym: one word with multiple meaning, in arabic المشترك Al-Mushtarik.

If you come to a word which has more than one possible meaning, is it possible that we say one word and it can have more than one possible meaning? The hanafis ansswer this question by going to a particular case, the case of Al-Mawali. It applies to both, the person who freed you and the person who is freed. It's a vague term. Hanafis found an example, if someone leaves a will and says, I'm going to leave such and such for my mawali and if he has both upper and lower mawali, then abu haneefah says that will he left is void. Since the word is undefined it cannot mean both. That's what the hanafee usooleen conclude from that. however they found another ruling from Abu Haneefah and this ruling says that if someone swears that he would not speak to his mawali and in that case if he speaks to any of them (upper or lower) then he's breaking his oath. So they said about homonym, that it's not used unless used in a negation. They came to this ruling about al-mushtarik based on the fiqh of Abu Haneefah.

Mutakallimoon start with pure theory, they are not basing their usool on pure fiqh. They would look in the Quran and see if a word is used as mushtarik and then in hadeeth and then in language and then to logic. Once they come up with the qaidah from this investigation, they apply the ruling as opposed to the way of the hanafis.

This historical fact explains why the hanafis have an independent approach and why on one hand we say the hanafis said this and the mutakallimoon said this. They are called mutakallimoon because their theory is based on talk.

Abu Haneefa had a methodology when forming fatwa. The Hanafi school is trying to derive or write down the usool after a time period of 200 years. Most of it is traced back to Abu Haneefa and his students.

Imam Shafai has a book kitab ul umm. However when you are trying to determine the usool, you do not have to refer to Imam Shafai's book, you rely on the Quran for the usool. Similarly with Imam Malik.

We have books on each school to highlight the various Imams. However there is not much difference between Imam Shafai and Imam Malik. Some people tried to combine Shafai and Maliki approaches but it did not succeed.

The whole reason why Imam Shafi wrote ar-risala, because he felt that from the time of sahabah to his time, he felt the principles of usool which were used by sahabah, he felt that the people were deviating from those principles esp. in the hanafi and maliki fiqh. So he wrote risalah to take people back to the original usool which was based on quran and sunnah.

It seems he wrote A version of Risalah while in Iraq but the final risalah that we have nowadays is the one written in Egypt.

Muhammad Hasan Shaibani was one of the students of Imam Malik.

So Imam Shafi is not starting from fiqh and going back. One of the thing that was stressed by him in ar-risalah was the issue of Khabr al-wahid and how some of the malikis were putting too much restrictions on them so he clarified that and he also addressed the extensive use of Logic that was being used by other madahib (like istihsaan etc).

Sharia in essence is law. The first question that is asked about law: Who is the legislator or Lawgiver, al-haakim? From shariah perspective, who is al-haakim? Allah (swt).

Why should Allah be the only Hakim? Allah is the Creator of all human beings so He has the knowledge to be our Legislator. He's unbias and all fair, the laws will be just and fair. Allah is merciful. Allah has declared himself to be Al-Haakim.

Is Prophet Mohamed (saw) a haakim? No. Allah is the only haakim. Some practices by Prophet (saw) were sanctioned by the Quran later. For example --- Janaza, Jumuah prayers were performed by the prophet before Allah swt ordered us to perform those actions. Sunnah is part of the revelation from Allah swt. Allah approved of Prophet Mohamed's (saw) action. Allah swt inspired prophet to perform these actions.

What about a mufti or mujtaheed? Aren't they giving us law when you ask them to make a fatwa? A fatwa that is not consistent with Quran or Sunnah, are you not supposed to follow it. We only accept and follow them if we believe they are correct and in accordance with the legislation of Allah swt.

What about human reasoning or akl? Can it be a source for law? Suppose you derive something from Quran or Sunnah based on your reasoning. Can akl determine what is good or evil by itself? What about more general, understanding of tauheed? Can akl recognize saying truth is good and telling a lie is evil? What is the view of Ahl-ul-Sunnah on this point?

Mutazillah - People who separate themselve - During time of Hasan al-basri, one of the students disagreed with him and started his own circle - One of the things that Mutazillah are well known for is akl. Akl can completely determine what is good or evil. And you will be held responsible by Allah swt for your actions even if you have not heard of Prophet or Islam. And the response of Asharis followers of Abul Hasan. The response says that akl cannot determine anything, something is good only because Allah swt said it and something is evil because Allah swt ordained it - an extreme response to Mutazillah.

Early scholars said that if the akl is sound then the akl is sufficient to determine what is good or evil but not to the specific case of fasting 30 days of Ramadhan. Where the early scholars differ from Mutazillah - Allah swt does not hold them responsible until they receive the message of Islam. Based on two clear verses from the Quran -

Surah Isra (15) We do not punish any people until we send messengers -

Muhsin Khan: Whoever goes right, then he goes right only for the benefit of his ownself. And whoever goes astray, then he goes astray to his own loss. No one laden with burdens can bear another's burden. And We never punish until We have sent a Messenger (to give warning).

Sahih International: Whoever is guided is only guided for [the benefit of] his soul. And whoever errs only errs against it. And no bearer of burdens will bear the burden of another. And never would We punish until We sent a messenger.

Muhsin Khan: Messengers as bearers of good news as well as of warning in order that mankind should have no plea against Allah after the Messengers. And Allah is Ever All-Powerful, All-Wise.

Sahih International: [We sent] messengers as bringers of good tidings and warners so that mankind will have no argument against Allah after the messengers. And ever is Allah Exalted in Might and Wise.

Mutazilah say in reality we don't need revelation. Aql is sufficient to follow the shariah.

Founder of Ashari is a former mutazillah.

Next time, some contemporary common implications of what we have just covered till now....more to come next Tuesday

Usool al-Fiqh 2009-10-19Edit

Concept of Al Hakim - From shariah point of view the only legislator is Allah swt. Prophet is not hakim nor is a mufti.

Does govt in Islam have right to make legislation?

A lot of topics that theoriticians (mutakallimoon) discuss are aqeedah topics.

The command to obey comes in front of Allah's name and in front of prophet's name. Obedience to people in authority is conditional to their obedience to Allah swt.

Prophet said: Listening and obeying is a right as long as you are asked to obey something sinful.

Tabarani hadeeth: There is no obedience if there is no obedience to Allah swt.

From a shariah perspective, there is no doubt there is rift between Islam and other forms such as secularism. There are people who say that Islam and secularism are in conflict. In secularism - religion is removed from governance and public affairs. This implies that Allah or god is not a hakim. Western society had bad history with religious rules. Universalize their experience is unfair, irrational.

Democracy - Karl Marx believed in democracy --- everyone should have same rights. Rule of the people - law is determined by majority or what the people want. This contradicts the authority of Allah as hakim, since people as whole are hakim. Other defn - representative govt - is that against shariah? If something that does not contradict shariah then it is not prohibited. People having a voice in who is ruling them - democracy depending upon definition can be in contradiction with shariah or is permissible.

Next concept - What kind of discourse/commands/speech from Al-Hakim? Who do these laws apply to? Etc

Communique from Allah swt (revelation) can be categorized into two categories:

1. Not directly related to law (Stories of the prophets, description of day of judgement.)

2. Related to law. Those verses related to law can be further divided into two sub-categories.

2.1 - Responsibility or "Demand "on human beings also known as hukum at-takleef (Establishing prayers, forbiding eating of carion, etc). Command you to do something mandatorily or recommend something for you to do. Forbid you or discourage you to do something. Leave the door open for you - mubaha. Fuqaha say hukum at-takleef is prescriptive law or defined law. Takleef means responsibility.

Some examples are Sun passing the meridian starts the time for Dhuhr prayer. Prayer is not valid except tahara. Conditions for perfoming an act. It is not permissible to marry your aunt --- conditions for prohibition. Selling milk is valid. Selling alcohol is not valid.

Hukum at-takleefe

Defintion: Communique or speech from Allah swt that requires some response or demand from human being.

For Hanafis it is divided into 10 categories for other schools it is divided into 8 categories

Other (mutakalimoon) schools: Obligatory category is just one Fard. Disliked categories is just one makrooh.

Fard (hanafi) --- definitely established, takes out of islam if one denies as obligation.

Within obligatory deeds, there are different levels. For example belief in Allah swt take precedence over other obligations. Not all obligagory acts are at the same level. Is it important to know the different levels of obligatory acts? Issues related to belief in Allah swt, salat, interactions with society are at higher level. If there is conflict between two obligatory acts and you do not have ability to perform both of them maybe due to time or financial limitations, which one should take precedence.

Hukuk allah - rights of allah

Hukuh al ibad - rights of human beings

October 26, 2009

=============

Huquuq Allah - Rights of Allah

Relationship between humans and Allah - prayer, fasting, etc

Public interest - all the laws related to society - included in this are huduud (legal punishments) - to safeguard society as whole - they have been laid down in the interest of society - people are not supposed to violate it - for example zinah, can then society say that we can give amnesty to violators - the act of adultery and the harms that can have on society, impact on children, break-down of society

There are some overlaps for example zakat is huquuq Allah and huquuq al ibad. Rights of the poor among the rich on the society. Which one is more dominant, it is huquuq Allah, hence no one has the right to drop it.

As soon as you enter into a contract, then you have to fulfill the rights of the contract

Murder - the family has the right to forgive the punishment to the murderer - hence it is from huquuq al ibad.

How can we conclude that an act is obligatory?

Allah states something in the imperative (fi'l amr)

Allah has prescribed (a sign that it is obligatory)

Strong warning in not performing an action (ex. going to hellfire, etc..)

fardh kifayah- communal obligation, if enough members of society perform that obligation then they're obsolved of the obligation, if nobody does it everyone is sinful (ex. salatul Janaza)

ex. there is a town that has 10 qadis who are qualified, 9 applicants drop out, the one that is left will be responsible (fardh ain) on him to take the position.

Some acts can be fard kifaya or fard ain depending on the situation. Zihad can be fard ain if attacked by non-muslims.

Can it be a worldly sense of fardh kifayah?

It could become fardh ain for people to become doctors/ulema due to a shortage.

Wajib al-muwasa' (freedom of time) and wajib al-Mudayak (restricted)

Restricted in sense of time (ex. when hajj starts no umrah can be done)

Once the fajr begins of ramadhan, then there is no other fasting except the fasting of ramadhan.

Act of prayer is different, you can make nawafil prayers even if the time of dhuhr has come, however as the time for prayer is fleeting, then it is encumbent upon you to pray dhuhr or asr whose time is fleeting.

Is it possible to fast the six days of shawwal when women still have to make up the missed fasts of ramadhan?

Can you double intention of fasting? You cannot do that with the six days of shawwal. However we can have two intentions for other fasts such as the fasting of Monday and Thursday and missed fasts of Ramadhan.

In general we have to pray if we miss it before the next prayer. what if the time of the next prayer is near endin?

Is it obligatory to make up the missed fasts immediately?

You can delay the prayers even if the time of prayer has started because your intention is to attend the congregational prayer which might start after 30 minutes

At-tahyat al masjid can be any prayers it could be the fard prayers.

Waajib al-muqadar (fixed amount)

Waajib ghair muqadar (not fixed)

Two categories: Shariah has defined exactly the amount you have to do and the other category the shariah has not defined it exactly.

Salat and zakat - what is obligatory is fixed

Birr al waladeen - it is an obligation but the exactly how much is not defined in shariah

How much you have to help wrt sadaqah

Depends upon culture and place and time

If you fail to do obligation which is quantified, you will still be held responsible for it until you fulfill the obligation

For Waajib ghar muqadar you will not be held responsible if you do not do it, or you cannot make up the missed acts

If there is something that is obligatory and it cannot be fulfilled except by performing some other action, then the dependent action also becomes obligatory. Example Before fighting the enemy, the prophet told the sahabah to break their fast in order for them to be strong enough the next day. In this case breaking the fast became waajib in order to accomplish the other obligations of fighting.

What about learning the arabic language? Is it obligagory or not?

Ibn taymiyah says arabic language is part of the deen, hence it fard-un-wajib. Since understanding kitab and sunnah is important to understand the deen

counter argument about learning Arabic is that the fatwa was given 700 years ago when there weren't as many translations.